The research writing in this selection, written by Hayden Williams, discusses the role competitiveness has on the gamification of brainstorming with competition. In this selected research paper it was learned that competition has varying effects on the engagement of participants in Williams' selected study. However, Williams did find that competition has an impact on performance on the participant. The research paper appears to follow the proper steps for research design through his structure and order of which he proceeds with his writing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Title, Abstract, References
Title:
Style--
Contains key words associated with the content
Length—no more than a sentence, but usually a fragment, no more than 25 words
Informative or Descriptive—verb or outcome keyword is associated with type of research, remembers
audience
Authors included in alpha order
Includes the school and the place where the research was performed
Abstract:
Brief, doesn’t add stylistic flourishes, defines terms used in the paper, utilizes the key words for
database cross-referencing, 250 words or less, written after research is done.
Format--
Starts with background info—past study on topic
Details on experimentation question, hypothesis, research plan/methods, and overall conclusions.
Be written in a way that it can be read independently from the paper.
References:
CSE*--numbered list at the bottom, superscript number corresponding
Direct quotes are considered plagiarism, paraphrase is paramount
Not necessarily in alpha order—usually in order of appearance.
Introduction:
Identify the problem and the justification for its import—style is rhetorical (ethos and logos…NO
PATHOS) , structure is a funnel—begin with broad concepts, focus down to---background, importance of
research, question/hypothesis—no subheadings in this section)
Include prior research influencing your work—reference heavy
Overtly state your hypothesis(es)
Don’t give the conclusion
Should be about 15-20% of whole paper length
Use literary present tense for background research and accepted theories, use past tense for your work
or unestablished theories
Assume that the reader has previous knowledge of topic—don’t need to explain basic common
knowledge of that field.
Introduction of variables
End with an overt statement of hypothesis.
Methods:
Introduces the procedure of how you answered your research question
Should have research plan and data analysis subsection and other subsections appropriate to your
research
Provide sufficient detail for replication, but avoid redundancy and superfluous info. Includes WHY
choices are made—the justification for methods and materials
Elements--
Study design—type and how collected data
Setting (details about environment for test)
Subjects (how you chose your population)
Data Collection—what was investigated, how collected, properties of the measurements
Data Analysis—statistical techniques, name and description—what tests will you use for relevance
testing?
Research plan—dependent and independent, Covariates/Influences (how will you mitigate your
potential influences), include what to do if you have missing data
Results:
Presented in the order of the experimentation (follow the storyline from the methods section)
Should be in service to, and overtly answer the research question
Past tense
Report the experimental group findings before the control group findings
Graphical displays designed with reader in mind (clearly labeled, captions, titles, etc) Don’t use excerpts
from the text as captions. Use horizontal lines on bar/line/plot graphs for readability.
Address figures, tables, graphs and images in the narrative section. Graphs and tables, and images,
should be numbered and referenced by number in the narrative.
Primary, secondary, and ancillary analyses are included
Don’t---write in first person, use passive voice
---don’t analyze or interpret the results
---don’t merely use p values---not helpful
----don’t assume graphs will be in color.
---don’t include raw data.
Don’t include specific results—done in next section.
Discussion/Conclusion:
Inverted funnel—brief description and interpretation of main findings, address the strengths and limitations of
your results, widens to implications and connection to past work,
Comparison of findings to other researchers’ work—especially if attempting to replicate results.
Address outliers and influences on findings (errors, bias)
Include how research plan could have been improved.
Address theoretical and practical applications of outcomes
What does data add to existing body of evidence?
Use words that are less “sure” in assertions—may, might, could; avoid words like “prove”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peer Review:
Title:
+ The author makes use of a relatively short, but not too small, of a title along with the proper formatting of where the research was conducted and authors of the writing.
Δ The author neglects to use audience-appropriate language with definitions included in the title. ie: Gamification
Abstract:
+The author's abstract is of appropriate length and states the main purpose of the writing.
Δ The author forgets to define the word: gamification and only gives an example of what it is.
Format:
+Identifies the background research well.
Δ It is difficult to understand and the hypotheses are not grouped together.
Introduction:
+Problem is clearly stated.
Δ Fails to use present/past tense in correct areas.
Methods:
+The methods listed are very thorough.
Δ The methods however, are missing some key details to allow replication.
Results:
+Author correctly refrains from using a passive tone and first person.
ΔThe results include some analysis.
Discussion/Conclusion:
+Author's conclusion wonderfully expresses the possible applications of the data.
ΔHowever, the author does not make comparisons of other's work.